Wisdom on what REDD is and isn’t…

“REDD and other climate change mitigation and adaptation measures will
only achieve lasting results if they are adapted to conditions on the
ground and help meet the needs of local people,” said Forests Dialogue
in a statement. “Mechanisms to engage and build capacity among local
stakeholders so they can participate effectively in decision-making
are of fundamental importance.” Dr. Daniel Nepstad, a leading tropical
forest ecologist who now heads up conservation at the Gordon and Betty
Moore Foundation, says that while these fears are valid, REDD may
offer a better alternative than the status quo – which has long led to
the displacement of native peoples from their lands at the hands of
developers. “REDD can benefit biodiversity conservation as well as
indigenous and rural peoples,”

Nepstad wrote in a report co-authored
last year with Stephan Schwartzman of Environmental Defense and Paulo
Moutinho of the Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazônia (IPAM).
“To succeed, national REDD programs must be consistent with UNFCCC and
other UN principles, be transparent and have the active involvement of
indigenous peoples and forest communities.” “Rejecting REDD will not
defend indigenous rights. Substituting official aid from developed
countries for carbon market funding will not be a better, less risky
alternative for reducing deforestation. Indigenous rights abuses,
often caused by the same activities that drive deforestation, must be
addressed directly.” Still other groups are taking a harder line,
opposing any incorporation of REDD into international climate policy
until the rights of forest people are determined and other issues are
worked out. “To attain sustainable forest and climate initiatives,
forest peoples must be fully consulted about their design,” said Tom
Griffiths of Forest Peoples Program, an indigenous rights’
organization. “International donors must also ensure that human rights
and forest sector reforms are guaranteed before any international
funding is released to developing countries for their national actions
on forest and climate issues.’ “It is alarming that such dangerous
forest carbon trading proposals are getting traction at the UN talks
while so many critical questions are left unanswered,” Kate Horner,
Friends of the Earth US climate campaigner, said in a statement
following the group’s release of a critique on the World Bank’s Forest
Carbon Partnership Facility, an initiative to kickstart REDD projects.
“We fear that this could be disastrous for biodiversity, the rights of
forest-dependent communities around the world and even our climate. If
forest carbon trading proposals are accepted, it would create the
climate regime’s largest loophole by allowing rich countries to buy
their way out of emission reductions.”
http://www.ecoearth.info/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=114571

— Posted to http://forestpolicyresearch.com via gmail to posterous and
also to forestpolicyresearch@yahoogroups.com

Posted via email from Deane’s posterous